What does it take to...

[Checkswrecks]

Sidenote; Have any studies been done into any corelations between accidents and education..

Rather than provide a bunch of links, the answer is yes, there are some education-related study results that you can Google. There are also some really good presentations from Europe and Oregon. I'd still go back to the classic old MAIDS study (Clicky), which found:

1. In 37% of cases, the primary accident contributing factor was a human error on the part of the PTW rider. In 13% of all cases, there was a decision failure on the part of the PTW rider.

2. Among the secondary contributing factors, PTW riders failed to see the other vehicle (OV) and they also made a large number of faulty decisions, i.e., they chose a poor or incorrect collision avoidance strategy.

4. In comparison to the exposure data, Unlicensed [AS IN: WITHOUT EDUCATION - BOB] PTW riders, illegally operating a PTW for which a licence is required, have a significantly increased risk of being involved in an accident.

5. PTW riders [AS IN: TYPICALLY MORE EXPERIENCED/EDUCATED - BOB] between 41 and 55 years of age were found to be under-represented, suggesting that they may have a lower risk of being involved in an accident when compared to other rider age categories.

6. When compared with the exposure data, 18 to 25 year old riders were found to be over-represented.

8. OV drivers holding PTW licenses were less likely to commit a perception failure than those without a PTW licence, i.e., they did not see the PTW or its rider.

The other thing you can look for is a European report that shows the benefits of their tiered licensing system. I haven't seen it in a couple of years, but it's got some really good comparison graphics between countries with the tiered scheme and those without.

Bob

 

[RiderCoach Lar]

I realize we all started somewhere, but I've seen a handful that are freshly minted out of the school that should NOT have passed. They just managed to get lucky on the skills portion. Some Ace the test, some fail, those are those in the bell curve. Its those that the course is supposed to weed out, that managed to pass for whatever reason, that are going to cause the instructors to question their intentions.

Interesting view. Those handful that you've seen "freshly minted out of the school that should NOT have passed", are you sure about that? Could it be perhaps you saw some new riders riding well beyond their skill level? Doesn't necessarily mean they should not have passed their Basic Rider Course. What we're looking for as instructors is a consistent level of proficiency over the course of several hours. Beyond that, we can't judge whether or not they'll continue to develop their newly-learned skills, whether or not they'll try to keep up with the more experienced riders and ride beyond they're skill level, or whether they'll be downright reckless or dangerous.....or....and I've seen this happen....whether they'll fail the class, tell people they passed in order to save face, and ride (illegally) any way.

I think many people have a distorted idea of what we as instructors can control and are responsible for. The cold hard fact is, we have 20 hours in which to teach and objectively evaluate a new rider. I will not be held responsible for any unsafe or irresponsible act that a student chooses to perform once they've passed my class. We preach safe responsible riding. We teach safe responsible riding. We objectively evaluate them to see that they are capable of riding safely and responsibly. I personally OVER-emphasize the need for riding within one's skill level and the need to continue to develop those skills with practice.

You are right, Bungie, we all have to start somewhere and I applaud those who start with a Basic Rider Course. Just be careful not to associate irresponsible riding beyond that class to whether or not they should have passed. That's far less likely than you think and would be like thinking anyone in a cage who's driven recklessly should not have been given a drivers license.

 

[Bungie]

You are right, Bungie, we all have to start somewhere and I applaud those who start with a Basic Rider Course. Just be careful not to associate irresponsible riding beyond that class to whether or not they should have passed. That's far less likely than you think and would be like thinking anyone in a cage who's driven recklessly should not have been given a drivers license.

You are of course correct in that assessment. I guess I should be more careful in my terminology, skill level and recklessness are two very different things. That being said, I'll still stand by my original statement. Throwing out reckless (which is what she did) her skill level is still WAY below what I consider normal for a new rider. She's dropped her bike a number of times - pretty much on a weekly basis in fact, jamming the front brake when parking, duck walking when starting off for a comical distance, unable to maintain the track in her lane, improper lane choice, target fixating, unable to maintain a consistent speed, 0 and I mean ZERO shoulder checks the list goes on and on. Throw this in with what appears to be a complete lack of awareness of her situation on a near constant basis (which IS the recklessness were talking about really) and no, she should have never passed.

Believe me when I say I'm not the only one who believes she's a danger. Many refuse to ride with her. She's already caused one minor accident on a group ride - ran into the bike in front of her, 3 bikes down, nobody hurt. Many have told her flat out she shouldn't ride, which she naturally takes offence to. She really is oblivious to her situation, and it goes back to riders course that she took which enabled her to get her license when your looking to place the responsiblity for her situation - excluding the rider as its obvious she's not capable of looking out for herself.

Now I'm not picking on the instructors or the course as designed. It does do a good job for the vast majority of students - I know the failure/dropout rate of the course locally is, I believe, something like 40%. That really is encouraging. But in the same breath, I know the course does fail occasionally in making potential riders realize this mode of transportation really isn't for them. Whether by realization, or plain old failure.

Last of me on this subject mostly becuase I know the Canuckian course is very different from the MSF course. But none of the instructors here would be taking offense if they knew deep down I was just talking out my ***. You know the course does pass some that it shouldn't.

 

[Gizmo]

I took the Basic MSF course in 2007 before getting back on a bike. Everyone in my class did pass and so many of them were talking about going out and getting 1000cc sport bikes or 1800cc cruisers. Even after the instructers were politely answering questions on the best way to become a responsible rider. After passing, I went out the next day, got my endorsement and shortly afterwards was in the saddle of my 800cc cruiser. I rode that for a year and only last month graduated to the FJR.

I'm so glad I rode the M50 for a year prior to getting the FJR. However, they are two totally different machines. Riding is a personal choice, which comes with responsibility. There will however be irresponsible people who ride motorcycles. It's these people who put themselves in danger and others too. Watch out for the asshats, SEE and be seen.

Ride Safe!

 

[happyPuppy]

Chris, the instructor's I am were referring to were all ex - military, some still active I believe we were near a large naval base. They were doing the usual in your face as any ex-military vet is aware of. My concern was the class was for brand new riders and were not expected to know anything. To chastise someone of not knowing what to do is wrong and I told him so after the course was over. I am sure MSF instructors have their hands full as it is and most of the instructors I know are very good. My complaint is with the program content , and apparent unwillingness to not strongly enough police their own MSF ranks. It is interesting I can go to a local state SB forum and ask what are the good programs and which are the bad ones ? The same programs come up again and again. I will even plug the best I know of in WA Puget Sound Safety they are first rate. That is where I point new riders too, and they are booked 6 months ahead, fantastic coaches and a program that offers additional classes to help improve your skill.

 

[kulwen]

My complaint is with the program content , and apparent unwillingness to not strongly enough police their own MSF ranks.

In NV we are policed. I taught 23 classes this year and during two of them I was audited by the Nevada Rider program, a RiderCoach Trainer. I know of at least one coach this year that was removed as a coach after he was audited. If, he wants to teach again he needs to take the intstructor course again.

 

[cougar8000]

+1 on what John said. In IL program director and even ITOD people stop by at times to check in on us.

Part of the problem is when they are inspected those instructors that you are reffing to change their ways and able to avoid problems.

Have you contacted program director and told them what you saw? If you did and got no response back, I would go further up the food chain. There is no reason to yell or treat students as they are FNG in the military. As you said, most of them come in fresh eager to learn.

 

[RiderCoach Lar]

But none of the instructors here would be taking offense if they knew deep down I was just talking out my ***.

For the record, I haven't taken offense. I have thicker than that. I've listened to much harsher criticism (ironically, from people who don't teach or have much of a commitment to rider education) in the past and will undoubtedly hear more in the future. I was simply pointing out the fact that one can't automatically make an assumption that because someone exhibits poor riding skills on the street after taking a Basic Rider Course, they should not have passed the class.

 

[Topspeed]

I've figured I would add my 2 cents worth for the sake of an interesting conversation. Jill (Silver Penguin), mentioned tiered licensing

I'm in favor of the tiered licensing but can't see it happening.
Jill

This year, Utah began a tiered licensing system 0-89, 90-249, 250-649, 650 and up CC. What you take your riding test on is the tier you fall into, with all lesser tiers being included of course.

Since this was started the middle of this summer I don't have any figures that show if it's a good or bad thing. I also, don't know what the repurcussions are for riding out side of your assigned tier, but its a start.

 

[El Toro]

I've figured I would add my 2 cents worth for the sake of an interesting conversation. Jill (Silver Penguin), mentioned tiered licensing

I'm in favor of the tiered licensing but can't see it happening.
Jill

This year, Utah began a tiered licensing system 0-89, 90-249, 250-649, 650 and up CC. What you take your riding test on is the tier you fall into, with all lesser tiers being included of course.

I guess no system is perfect, but I wonder how much they've thought about the fact that it takes different skills to run a YZF R6 which fits in the 250-649 category, than say a Suzuki M50 cruiser which fits in the 650 and up category. I would almost rather see a power to weight ratio, or even an "insurance" horsepower spec used if we were going to go to a tiered licensing system.

 

[Topspeed]

I agree with you on that. Power to weight would seem to be a better starting place. Also, the only way this gets enforced is if you get pulled over.

 

[El Toro]

FWIW, I know that the MSF courses do wash out some participants from time to time. A few years back my wife decided she was interested in learning to ride. She and a friend signed up for the beginner's course together. Neither of them had any prior riding experience. Her friend's husband had bought her a Kawasaki Cruiser, and she'd already dropped it in the driveway three or four times. I had an old CB125S that I thought my wife could learn on after she'd taken the course, but we never got to that point.

The bikes provided for the course were 250 Rebels. Everyone did fine in the classroom part, but when they moved out to the parking lot, my wife, who is a very petite woman, dropped the 250 a couple of times, and three others in the class also had trouble keeping the shiny side up.

In the end, a couple of these folks, including my wife, decided that motorcycling as a rider was not for them and they did not complete the course. The instructors offered them a rain check and said they could come back and finish the course at some future time if they wanted to.... but for my wife, the experience of actually spending time in the parking lot was enough to convince her that she did not want to head out onto the public roads.

A question one might ask is "why weren't you teaching your wife to ride yourself?" Well, it goes back to the time I thought I could teach folks to ride without any formal training myself as an instructor. I had tried to teach my son how to ride a 1992 Seca II. After letting him duck walk the bike around in the driveway, and after feathering the clutch to move the bike forward and stop, I then encouraged him to make a slow ride forward, pull in the clutch, stop, turn around, and return....

Well, never having previously had any experience with a clutch, he let it out too quickly, responded with too much throttle, rode the bike on the rear wheel down the driveway, out onto the front lawn, heading for the street and traffic, and decided to ditch it. He landed in the soft grass, and he wasn't going that fast, and he was young, so he didn't hurt himself, but he did a good thousand dollars worth of damage to the bike. I decided after that experience to leave rider training to the professionals.

When I was young and learning myself, the owner of the shop where I bought my first bike took me out to a parking lot, spent about 10 minutes with me, and I was on my own after that. Of course a Seca II (modern version of a beginner bike) has 60 hp, while in those days a beginner bike had more like 10 hp. I think its a lot saner to learn on a 220 pound 10 hp bike than on a 430 pound 60 hp bike, but the latter are common as first bikes nowadays, and many guys swing their leg over much more powerful mounts as their first experience. No wonder we need MSF.

 

[Fred W]

The second step in learning to ride a street bike should be learning to ride a dirt bike.

In an open field (no trees)

and with full MX gear.

The first step should be learning to ride a bicycle.

 

[Topspeed]

The first step should be learning to ride a bicycle.

You have no idea how nervous I become as an instructor when I ask a class how many have never ridden a bicycle and I see I hand go up. It gets even worse when that same hand gets raised at the question "How many have driven a stick?"

 

[Silver Penguin]

You have no idea how nervous I become as an instructor when I ask a class how many have never ridden a bicycle and I see I hand go up. It gets even worse when that same hand gets raised at the question "How many have driven a stick?"

Do you get the young kids who give you a puzzled look when you ask that question? Less and less youngester these days have even SEEN a stickshift, never mind driven one.

DH taught a class last week where at least two of the students (who had passed their classroom evaluations) had no clue about the controls, during exercise 1. One lady argued with him, that the levers on the bars were both brakes. Another young man was oblivious to the use and function of the clutch. The real scary part? He claimed to have put 15-20 miles on his own, brand new R6.

I taught a lady who told me that the ignition key was broken on her GN125, because when you turned it, the bike didn't fire up. She claimed to have been riding HD's for years, yet believed that a bike starts like a car, when you turn the key.

In England there used to be two classes of driving license (for a car). If you passed your test in an automatic, you were only allowed to drive an automatic. Perhaps we're going to see a generation of motorcyclists who can only ride a scooter or an AE?

Jill

 

[El Toro]

In England there used to be two classes of driving license (for a car). If you passed your test in an automatic, you were only allowed to drive an automatic. Perhaps we're going to see a generation of motorcyclists who can only ride a scooter or an AE?

We had the same system in Massachusetts when I took my driver's test over 40 years ago. If you took your test with a standard transmission vehicle, your license was good for either standard or automatic.... but if you took the test with an automatic, your license was only valid for driving automatics.

 

[dhalen32]

The second step in learning to ride a street bike should be learning to ride a dirt bike.
In an open field (no trees)

and with full MX gear.

The first step should be learning to ride a bicycle.

Fred:

In many states bicycle riding skill is a prerequisite. I operate a site in Nebraska and I personally "interview" each student as I get them registered. If they confess to not being able to ride a bicycle, the interview is ended and their money is refunded on the spot. If they have not ridden a bicycle in the last year then I recommend that they borrow one and take a spin around their neighborhood prior to arriving at their class. I have had only one person respond "Do I need to be able to ride a bicycle?" in the past six years I have been doing this.

I have been teaching MSF classes since 1992 and I can think of just one time when a student was unable to demonstrate that they could balance their training bike during the first part of the class. The student was unwilling to put their feet on the pegs and coast unassisted during the old "buddy push" exercise. I explained that I had to see them do this before they could move on to the next exercise. I gave them one last attempt and when feet were dragged all of the way across the range I excused them from the rest of the class.

Dave